Roman Church means the Church of Rome, and those under her jurisdiction (Pastor Aeternus aside) and celebrates the Roman Rite.

That really isn't "a church".

I'm not saying that would be a bad thing -- in that case, presumably the Mozarabic Rite, the Bragan Rite, the Ambrosian Rite etc would each correspond to a separate church -- but it's no good pretending things that really aren't.

The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, so it is the Roman Church. The Pope isn't the Bishop of Latin.

Well, I don't object to the Diocese of Rome being called a church. What I meant is that all those who use the Roman Rite aren't a church -- depending how you look at it, they are either many churches (many dioceses), or a portion of one church (the Latin Church).

After your years in Eastern Catholicism, I would think you'd understand the difference between a church and a rite.

Welcome to the ranks of our group of those illustrous men banished from CAF.

You mean permanently? If so I guess I don't qualify.

Wouldn't know- the people on CAF like me- until I get in the Traditionalists section. Then people don't like me no more... I mean, just because some of my traditions are older than Trent...

Recently I've been getting on alright with some of the Catholics that I used to butt-heads with a lot , but even so I feel like its a cordiality with little underlying agreement.

They're fine until I mention I like the NO Mass because its elements are older. "Oh, you mean THAT thing? That thing which was nOT promulgated by the Council of Trent! And God-forbid, allowed people to not use entirely Latin? Is outrage!!"

Welcome to the ranks of our group of those illustrous men banished from CAF.

You mean permanently? If so I guess I don't qualify.

Wouldn't know- the people on CAF like me- until I get in the Traditionalists section. Then people don't like me no more... I mean, just because some of my traditions are older than Trent...

Recently I've been getting on alright with some of the Catholics that I used to butt-heads with a lot , but even so I feel like its a cordiality with little underlying agreement.

They're fine until I mention I like the NO Mass because its elements are older. "Oh, you mean THAT thing? That thing which was nOT promulgated by the Council of Trent! And God-forbid, allowed people to not use entirely Latin? Is outrage!!"

In his famous Bull Quo Primum, Pope St. Pius V forbade changing the traditional Latin Mass.

Pope St. Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore, July 14, 1570:

“Now, therefore, in order that all everywhere may adopt and observe what has been delivered to them by the Holy Roman Church, Mother and Mistress of the other churches, it shall be unlawful henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than this Missal published by Us… Accordingly, no one whosoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, direction, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should any venture to do so, let him understand that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”[2]

On April 3, 1969, Paul VI replaced the Traditional Latin Mass in the Vatican II churches with his own creation, the New Mass or Novus Ordo. Since that time, the world has seen the following in the Vatican II churches which celebrate the New Mass or Novus Ordo:

The world has seen Clown Masses, in which the “priest” dresses as a clown in utter mockery of God.

The world has seen a priest dressed as Dracula; in a football jersey accompanied by cheerleaders; as a cheese-head…

…driving a Volkswagen down the aisle of church as the people sing hosanna. There have been disco Masses…

...gymnastic performances during the New Mass; balloon Masses; Carnival Masses;

…nude Masses, at which scantily clad or nude people take part. The world has seen juggling Masses, at which a juggler performs during the New Mass.

The world has seen priests celebrate the New Mass with Dorito Chips;

…with Mountain Dew; on a cardboard box; with cookies; with Chinese tea accompanied by ancestor worship; with a basketball as the priest bounces it all over the altar; with a guitar as the priest plays a solo performance. The world has witnessed the New Mass with a priest almost totally nude as he dances around the altar or with other high-wire abominations…

The world has seen New Masses with priests dressed in native pagan costumes; with a Jewish Menorah placed on the altar; with a statue of Buddha on the altar; with nuns making offerings to female goddesses; with lectors and gift bearers dressed up as voodoo Satanists. The world has seen the New Mass at which the performer is dressed in a tuxedo and tells jokes. The world has seen rock concerts at the New Mass; guitar and polka New Masses; a puppet New Mass; a New Mass where the people gather round the altar dressed as devils; a New Mass where people perform lewd dances to the beat of a steel drum band. The world has seen a New Mass where nuns dressed as pagan vestal virgins make pagan offerings.

The world has also seen New Masses incorporating every false religion. There have been Buddhist New masses; Hindu and Muslim New Masses; New Masses where Jews and Unitarians offer candles to false gods. There are churches where the entire congregation says Mass with the priest; where the priest sometimes talks to the people instead of saying Mass.

What we have catalogued is just a tiny sampling of the kind of thing that occurs in every diocese in the world where the New Mass is celebrated, to one degree or another. Our Lord tells us, “By their fruits you shall know them” (Mt. 7:16). The fruits of the New Mass are incalculably scandalous, sacrilegious and idolatrous. This is because the New Mass itself, even in its most pure form, is a false, invalid Mass and an abomination.

Even an organization which defends the New Mass was forced to admit the following about the typical New Mass – i.e., the New Mass normally offered in the churches (without even necessarily considering the aforementioned abominations and sacrileges that are commonplace): “Most of the New Masses we’ve attended… are happy-clappy festivities, the music is atrocious, the sermons are vacuous, and they are irreverent...”[3]

When the New Mass came out in 1969, Cardinals Ottaviani, Bacci, and some other theologians wrote to Paul VI about it. Keep in mind that what they said about the New Mass concerns the Latin Version, the so-called “most pure” version of the New Mass. Their study is popularly known as The Ottaviani Intervention. It states:

“The Novus Ordo [the New Order of Mass] represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent.”[4]

They could clearly see that the Latin version of the New Mass was a striking departure from the teaching of the Council of Trent. Of the twelve offertory prayers in the Traditional Mass, only two are retained in the New Mass. The deleted offertory prayers are the same ones that the Protestant heretics Martin Luther and Thomas Cranmer eliminated. The New Mass was promulgated by Paul VI with the help of six Protestant Ministers.

The six Protestant Ministers who helped design the New Mass were: Drs. George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian.

Paul VI even admitted to his good friend Jean Guitton that his intention in changing the Mass was to make it Protestant.

Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the [New] Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass.”[5]

Paul VI removed what was too Catholic in the Mass in order to make the Mass a Protestant service.